Zoning Board Rejects Proposed Cell Tower in Quarry

Residents opposed to the proposed construction of a cellular communications tower off Dock Watch Hollow Road were ecstatic on Monday night as the Warren Township Zoning Board unanimously rejected an application by Verizon Wireless and T-Mobile to construct a new cell tower in the 23-acre former quarry. 

"I'm in shock," said Jeff Foose, a Martinsville resident who grew up in Warren and spent the last year fighting against the tower's proposed construction. "I think this was a seminal effort by a group of dedicated citizens who came together over the last year to share info and resources against a cell tower they did not want."

Although the residents—who were from Warren, Bridgewater and Martinsville—did play a role in the decision, the largest factors in the applicants' demise, according to the board, were the inability to provide a clear reason why the tower was needed and a lack of recognition of alternative technologies that could alleviate the need for a 160-foot cell tower.

"When this whole thing started, I, like a number of my colleagues, was convinced that the quarry was the perfect location for a cell tower," said board president Foster Cooper, recapping sentiments of the entire board. "But as I listened to testimony and read up on newer technology coming out, I am of the opinion that this particular area would be better suited for spot coverage rather than a lattice tower. There are more questions than answers at this point." 

Cooper was referring chiefly to case testimony that pertained to the applicability of a distributed antenna system (DAS), which uses a series of antennae, such as the forthcoming Alcatel Lucent light radio Cube technology, to distribute cell signals across  areas where radio transmissions are weakest.  

During last month's zoning board meeting, the applicant's attorney, Greg Meese, reintroduced radio frequency (RF) engineer Glenn Pierson to testify on the suitability of DAS in the quarry application. Pierson was strongly against using the technology for the quarry. He insisted that it was not meant to alleviate cell towers or to supply radio frequency across wide distances, such as a 23-acre parcel.   

In response, the residents brought forward Dr. Hong Jiang, a Warren resident, who was proffered as an expert witness in wireless systems. Although Jiang told the board that he had 15 years of experience in satellite systems research in the telecommunications industry, Meese questioned the relevancy of his experience, particularly in DAS applications. 

"I don't think this witness has the requisite experience, training or employment to give an opinion on the networks being proposed by these two applicants," Meese said.

After 30 minutes of Jiang attempting to convince the board that he should be admitted as an expert, board president Foster Cooper asked the board to deliberate briefly. 

"I do not have experience with utility regulations, but I do have experience in satellite communications," Jiang said. "I have done extensive research in these systems."   

After a few minutes, board member John Villani summarized the board's collective opinion: "Dr. Jiang may be an expert in a lot of things, and I would give a lot of weight to his testimony but I would not recognize him as an expert witness," Villani said. 

Jiang, who also had planned to present a document to reinforce his position, was informed that it contained information that would present him as an expert witness. The document was not admitted into evidence.

The residents then brought real estate professional James Longo, who was apparently supposed to testify as an expert on the proposed cell tower's impact on township home values, however, Meese's questioning clarified that Longo was not a certified home appraiser. Longo, who at first said he was certified then changed his response, was left to explain that he had spoken to several potential home buyers, some from as far away as Beijing, who would no longer consider purchasing a residence in Warren because of the cell tower issue.

Jiang returned once again in the three-and-half hour meeting, to present "facts" based on a wireless coverage map, which he downloaded from the Internet, that shows 21 towers within four miles of the quarry. Presumably, his argument was that the number of towers was sufficient to provide cell coverage across the area without building a new tower. He did not have a chance to complete his citizen testimony as he kept slipping into comments that the board considered indicative of expert testimony.

The meeting came to a conclusion with several impassioned  comments from residents who live on Jennifer Lane and surrounding streets.

"When I purchased my home, my stipulation was no Route 78, no power tower and no cell phone tower," said Ronald Pimpao, who lives on Dock Watch Hollow Road in his second home after the first was destroyed in a fire. "Understand that I built my dream home and then to realize that there was a cell tower proposed for my back yard was completely crushing. I don't see a need for it."

Pimpao's neighbors has similar sentiments.

"This is something I don't want," said 29-year resident Robert Zarrow, who lives on nearby Jennifer Lane. "I live here because it's rural town. I have a Verizon cell phone with a data plan and don't have any problems. I don't want an eyesore in my backyard."